Tech D today!

[Jmonty71]

You just can't take a very good performance from the d today and say just that. Always a but with you. What is going to take? Shutting everyone out that is left on our schedule? They scored less against us than they did a top 5 team.

Truth is the truth. I think after the first series, we made an adjustment and Pitt couldn't figure it out. I give total credit to the D and how they buckled down. The tackling was better. The pressure on the QB was better. Not saying we should shut everyone out. If anything, I am giving credit for making that adjustment after the first series.

 

[Eastman]

Typical post game dialogue
CPJ "the offense saved your a.. today"
Roof "yep"
Today:
Roof " the defense saved our a.. today"
CPJ. "Yep"
I'll bet Roof will like today's conversation better!

 

[MikeJackets1967]

 

[Jmonty71]

Let me throw this in here too, Brant Mitchell may have played his best game a Jacket today. Hard hitting, sure tackling and in position ALL day!

True. On the other hand, he needs to learn to not get caught up in the blocking fray. I thought the DL and DBs outshined the LB corps. The hitting and tacking was great. The Austin twins are ballers!

 

[33jacket]

Great job by d. Far more aggressive. I loved the secondary alignments and no three man rushes

 

[AE 87]

Here's how Cuse quoted CPJ in post-game presser:

"were were more agressive last 2 games, more stunts, more pressure, our guys are better at that... not huge/not long, but quick and fast.... other than 1st drive where we turned a guy loose, we didn't give up big plays... negative plays make it hard for the offense to go... on the flip side we gave the ball away, jumping offsides, we have 1 snap count its not complicated"​

Now, I think that the take away is that our improved D resulted from changing what we're doing. I'm not sure how one concludes that being "more aggressive" and running "more stunts" and bringing "more pressure" can be translated into doing the same thing that we've been doing. Moreover, I'm not sure how one can conclude that we were able to have the results that we had today if our problem was primarily talent.

In other words, it seems to me that the data of today's good D actually supports what the Roof doubters have been saying more than the Roof-defender narrative.

That being said, the changes were made, and it looks like we might have a competitive D. We'll see when we play a better offense.

 

[wreckrod]

I'd give the defense a solid A. It was a B+ at halftime cause the 58 second field goal drive irked me. But back up to an A when they allowed 10 total points and gave up 0 points on 4 turnovers.

Plus, a lot of it was just being in good position and making tackles. Wasn't just Pitt dropping open passes.

 

[CHE90]

True. On the other hand, he needs to learn to not get caught up in the blocking fray. I thought the DL and DBs outshined the LB corps. The hitting and tacking was great. The Austin twins are ballers!

I like those Austin twins. We will miss them next year.

 

[Jmonty71]

Here's how Cuse quoted CPJ in post-game presser:

"were were more agressive last 2 games, more stunts, more pressure, our guys are better at that... not huge/not long, but quick and fast.... other than 1st drive where we turned a guy loose, we didn't give up big plays... negative plays make it hard for the offense to go... on the flip side we gave the ball away, jumping offsides, we have 1 snap count its not complicated"​

Now, I think that the take away is that our improved D resulted from changing what we're doing. I'm not sure how one concludes that being "more aggressive" and running "more stunts" and bringing "more pressure" can be translated into doing the same thing that we've been doing. Moreover, I'm not sure how one can conclude that we were able to have the results that we had today if our problem was primarily talent.

In other words, it seems to me that the data of today's good D actually supports what the Roof doubters have been saying more than the Roof-defender narrative.

That being said, the changes were made, and it looks like we might have a competitive D. We'll see when we play a better offense.

I for one... Am glad that Roof has put some bite into his dogs.. For the last few years.. We didn't have much bite. I hope Roof keeps the aggressiveness going. However; I'm sure he believes in continuous improvement. There was some areas that need shored up. But, overall I give the D an A-. I thought the DL and DBs really shined today. The LBs seemed to get caught up in the mix. But, that can be fixed.

 

[Towaliga]

The D gave up 79 yards total offense on the first drive. It took until 5 minutes or so left in the game for Pitt to double that amount. If anyone adds a "but" to their discussion on how the D played today, they need to admit they have preconceived perceptions/biases they can't overcome.

 

[deeeznutz]

I was so happy to see them do well. I've criticized Roof a bunch, but that was a much better called game the guys did the little things like wrapping up much better. Andre and Simmons need to finish those sacks and I'll be happy all year!

DiNucci was really good about pocket presence, he knew the perfect moment to step up to avoid the pressure.

 

[AE 87]

The D gave up 79 yards total offense on the first drive. It took until 5 minutes or so left in the game for Pitt to double that amount. If anyone adds a "but" to their discussion on how the D played today, they need to admit they have preconceived perceptions/biases they can't overcome.

Absolutely. Clearly our biggest problem has not been talent as some here have been saying.

 

[BobintheATL99]

Great effort by the D preserved a W while the O and STs needed help. Meanwhile, Clemson is looking mortal.... Ill take it. Coach has something to chew on to improve, and the D looked good (outside of the first drive). I'm happy all around


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[stech81]

I'd give the defense a solid A. It was a B+ at halftime cause the 58 second field goal drive irked me. But back up to an A when they allowed 10 total points and gave up 0 points on 4 turnovers.

Plus, a lot of it was just being in good position and making tackles. Wasn't just Pitt dropping open passes.

There are no A's at Tech .

 

[Milwaukee]

So far in 6 halves of football the D has played well in 5 of them, correct? I'll take that at this point.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

People will say Pitt has a bad offense, and it's true. But we've made plenty of bad offenses look decent in the past. Not today. All around great effort by the D outside the opening drive. 0 points allowed off 4 turnovers is always something to be proud of.

We managed to make their offense look good on the opening drive of the game, but after that it was lights out for the defense. Couldn't be prouder of them. For once Roof made adjustments after that drive rather than waiting till the half. Kudos to him for that.

 

[stech81]

OK be honest how many thought uh oh after the first after Pitt scored so fast ?

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

OK be honest how many thought uh oh after the first after Pitt scored so fast ?

I for sure did.

 

[85Escape]

My stubborn opinion is my stubborn opinion. I think after the first series, we made an adjustment and Pitt couldn't figure it out. I give total credit to the D and how they buckled down. The tackling was better. The pressure on the QB was better. Not saying we should shut everyone out. If anything, I am giving credit for making that adjustment after the first series.

FTFY

 

[lv20gt]

Who knew all it took was allowing only 1 TD and 6 three and outs 4 coming off of our own turnovers for people to be happy with the defense lol.